The issue is nto my use of th ewords, it's your decision to create a different meaning to what I said. Your choice to create a different meaning doesn't mean that I equivocated, it means you created a strawman.
Now, instead of pretending that your feelings on the issue have merit, you could actually present an argument in rebuttal where you source something other than yourself. BEcause, quite frankly, you are not a very good source.
I don't care what you said because what you say has no merit. What Pope John Paul said has merit. When you are Pope, you can say things with Authoerity. Until then, stop pretending to have authority you do not. Pope John Paul said that the Church does not have the AUTHOURITY to ordain women as priests. That ios entirely different than your opinion that it is rooted in "liturgical tradition and is a doctrinal matter". If it was subject to change, teh church would have the authority to ordain women as priests.This is incorrect, as I said earlier the prohibition of female ordination is rooted in liturgical tradition and is a doctrinal matter, and is therefore subject to change.
It absolutely does warrant that assumption. when the pope talks in his "infallibility mode" it is the word of God.Thus, it does not warrant the assumption that "God does not want women to be priests."
What it doesn't warrant is the assumption that women will never become priests. The wording Pope John Paul II used was specifically worded to allow for a future papal decree where the church is granted the authority.
But it most definitely implies that, at this time, God does not want women to be priests.
Now, instead of citing yourself as a source n rebuttal, try someone with greater authority.
How is "not equal from a sacremental standpoint" in any way shape or form a pivot from "not fully and completley equal"?Though it entails that women are not equal from a sacramental standpoint, this is a very different matter. I see that you have pivoted your point once again, apparently to avoid admitting to your earlier mistake, which is fine. I take this as tacit acknowledgment that you were wrong.
Stop making **** up. It's dishonest.
Are you trying to paint my argumetn as based on "vitriol" simply becasue you are incapable of presenting a decent rebuttal, or because you simply enjoy dishonest tactics in debate?Perhaps your vitriol is warranted, like I said, that is your business
Prove that claim instead of simply restating it. You are not a competant source, and thus, you need something other than yourself to provide evidence of that claim. I've provided actual evidence to the contrary. If you cannto provide evidence in rebuttal, I'll accept it as your concession of the point and admission of ignorance on the subject.but you are nevertheless mistaken. The Catholic teaching is that God regards both men and women equally.